i am about to buy a new lens, and I'm searching a wide or a "normal" (at least something wider than my 45mm)

i would like to shoot "semi-landscapes" and such and I find my 45mm too telephoto like. So my questions are:

Can you do semi-landscapes with a 25mm?

Does the Sigma have very bad AF, and how is the IQ?

The Sigma actually has very GOOD AF and IQ. The only issues with it are that it's bigger than it needs to be because it covers a larger APS-C image circle, and it's only f2.8. But it's also very inexpensive for the quality.

And at last, is the 17mm too expensive when you compare it to the sigma in terms of IQ and AF (As far as I know is the 17mm lightning fast)

my current gear is the OM-D E-M5, the 75-300mm II and the 45mm 1.8

I hope you can help me!

The Sigma actually has very GOOD AF and IQ. The only issues with it are that it's bigger than it needs to be because it covers a larger APS-C image circle, and it's only f2.8. But it's also very inexpensive for the quality.

Do you actually use any of these lenses, the size and weight difference is very small, in fact its tiny.

19mm = 60.6 x 45.7 mm, 140g

17mm = 57.5 x 35.5 mm, 120g

I never said the lens was heavier, I said it was bigger - do you actually read the posts you reply to? My only point was, it's not a pancake lens, and it's significantly larger than both the 14mm f2.5 and the 20mm f1.7. And yes, I use the lens, and I like it. But I would use it more if it was pocketable on my E-PL5 the way the 14mm lens is.

You claim it is bigger than it need be because its 3mm bigger than the 17mm, and you made no mention of pancake

I also never mentioned it being heavy but you got that burr up your butt in any case - despite my never having mentioned it.

Generally speaking, as size increases, so does weight.

Well in fact the lens is a little heavier - I just don't think that it's a significant issue.

Well in fact the lens is a little heavier

Yes it is as I pointed out.

I just don't think that it's a significant issue.

So why all the fuss ?

I didn't make one - I recommended the lens. You are the one that made a fuss, because you misread my initial post and took issue with it for no apparent reason. I mentioned a couple of minor detriments (no lens is perfect) and its attributes, while saying it was great value for the quality.

I didn't make one

You were and still are, its time you knocked it on the head.

Actually, Paul, it was you that started it because the other bloke made a point about size (relating to the image circle) and you misinterpreted it as weight, accompanied by some hissy comment along the lines of, "Do you actually use these lenses". Ever since then, you've been trying to fudge your error with increasing desperation.